It appears that you're running an Ad-Blocker. This site is monetized by Advertising and by User Donations; we ask that if you find this site helpful that you whitelist us in your Ad-Blocker, or make a Donation to help aid in operating costs.

A huge amount of bandwidth to say the least. Probably be affordable in 10 years or so right? Wrong try 2. Verizon will be starting a program next year. FTTP "Fiber to the Prim". This will allow connections at 100mbs per sec and up. '

What do you think the future of the internet is. Time to get a digital video camera. Internet TV?

Well, you have 100 mbs per sec bandwidth. fast enough to steam digital video and perfect suround sound. You going to still use a 15 to 40 kb page?

I for see more media rich content. My question is what? What do you think will be next? Programing will never go away I am sure. One thing, there is more room for encryption now. 100 mbs per sec. on FTTP

the internet2 will be upgraded to 10 gig per sec on the backbone shortly. That means FTTP will probably grow like dial up did a few years back...

BTW, yes they are using IPv6. Of course... There is nothing better out there yet.

I think that inline video will be popular the way flash is popular now. Higher quality everything. I doubt there will be a low version of any website, because creating a page big enough to be heavy on your bandwidth would be hard without adding in extra shit you don't need or cluttering the page up til people mistake it for an encyclopedia.

I don't think things will change a whole lot though, because there isn't much reason for your pages to be more than 2 megs, I think that mostly sites will have larger download archives (and web hosts will offer more space and bandwidth).

Take Google for example, now it is acceptable to have a larger page since dial-up isn't considered the norm, yet they keep it simple. Of course, there will still be sites that offer massive graphic layouts. I just think that after so much, it isn't necessary.

I don't think there is any reason to increase the speed after this, except for you people downloading 40 gigs of mp3's right now. And 200 gigs of porn, yes, 200.

That is what I am saying SR. Next year there will be a new broad band. FTTP (Fiber to the primesis) You will have a straight fiber pipe to your house. 100 mbs speed. Quit masterbating, it will start in the cities first of course. But bell south, Verizon, sprint and many other telco's are agrreeing on standards now

And really, a fiber connection straight into everyone's house? This in itself will take years to happen. I'm excited that I might just see such a thing in my lifetime, but not in the next five years. Regular broadband is still totally fine for most people to surf the net with. There's no reason other than the people who make web pages saying "Well, we'll be able to do " to make this happen so soon. Hell the majority of people still can't figure out email and you're talking about 100mbps of bandwidth into every house? I think we are farther away from this than you think

Originally posted by Infinite:[QB]Regular broadband is still totally fine for most people to surf the net with.QB]

Yeah and horses were good enough for people to move around town with before cars were popular. Most people can't figure out email? Are you saying that most people won't be able to view a website? What?

why are you nit-picking arguments that have nothing to do with the issue. It's infinite's opinion if broadband is fine. No right or wrong about it.

Fact of the matter is, unless all this wonderful broadband becomes as cheap as cable/dsl then who cares if the internet speeds up, the end user won't enjoy it. Business and schools and government agencies can go ahead and jizz in their pants with the possibilities like improved video conferencing and various WAN services. It won't be very special to us.

The entire theme of his post was the argument that it will take a long time before we can enjoy those speeds. His supporting arguments included the opinion that most people don't NEED more bandwidth. So without the demand, it won't happen as soon as one may think. He even stated that he is excited to see such a prospect, but that he doesn't think he'll see it in the next 5 years.

I happen to agree with infinite in how MOST people don't need more bandwidth. Snappy email, great page load times. What we have is fine... for most people.

Sometimes you gotta read a post a couple times to get a good judgement on what a guy actually meant.

You guys are missing the whole point. This IS launching next year. Urban areas first. The new broad band is just around the corner. My point is this could spark a whole new e-conomy again. You do not need the bandwidth now. But you might when it is avaiable.

That is my second point. With 100 mbs of bandwidth avaiable at affordable prices(This will be marketed toward normal joes) what do you see happening? Flash MX2 rendering video? More WiFi access? Appliances share bandwidth with your PC?

You are all thinking short term and small.

Cable is like $50 a month right? 7 years ago it was more like $100 a month. Telco's will hype this to compete with cable companies.

Also SR VoIP could mean no phone costs. Yet another reason to justify the extra money.

well my entire argument hinges on that price. I mean... there's nothing to talk about. We all agree it would be kick ass. Most of us have our doubts. What will happen will happen anyway and if things happen to be good we'll take advantage of it.

SR managed to sum up what I was saying quite nicely. I don't really think I have anything to add to that.

Quote:

You guys are missing the whole point. This IS launching next year. Urban areas first. The new broad band is just around the corner. My point is this could spark a whole new e-conomy again. You do not need the bandwidth now. But you might when it is avaiable.

And you're gonna tell me that EVERY single endevour that is launched is a total success? I don't think so. Sometimes ideas come along that are absolutely fantastic on paper, but seriously lack such things as proper funding, widespread acceptance, adequate demand, or various other factors. I know I'm being pessimistic here, but try and think objectively here. can you honestly see this being widely accepted by the general public in the next five years? I cannot. Last time I checked the cost of fiber was still pretty high, and the logistics of running said fiber to every household would be astronomical. Who is going to pay for this? The end user? Not when they can get cable or dsl for a fraction of the cost while keeping more than adequate functionality.

I just think this sounds far too ambitious a project for it to happen so soon, that's all.

Originally posted by Infinite:Sometimes ideas come along that are absolutely fantastic on paper

That's what they said about Communism. Just like communism, though, Internet 2 is gonna work out.

I think that whole Giant WiFi for Everyone In The City thing will get more popular.

My like second uncle or something in San Fransisco has some internet, phone, and cable deal where they get 10 megs a second for fiberoptics. They said it was really popular there, and supposedly gonna take off. If so many people there get fiberoptics, I don't see why so many other people couldn't.

I think I2 will mostly just make file sharing easier. We'll get pissed when DVD rips take more than a minute to download. I can't wait to get pissed about something that great.